Why Do 36 Percent of Americans Have a Positive View of Socialism?
Socialism promises many things and claims to prioritize people over profits. But what people actually get is different.

Socialism is popular!
A Pew study reports that more than a third of American adults view it positively.
How is this possible?
Little has brought more misery—first in the Soviet Union, then in China, Cuba, Nicaragua, now Venezuela.
One reason young people support socialism is because their social media feeds show videos made by popular but economically illiterate people.
TikTok star Madeline Pendleton has 1.6 million subscribers. My new video shows her telling them: "Socialism is working better than capitalism 93 percent of the time!"
Where does she get 93 percent?
From a study published in 1986 by self-described Marxists in the Journal of Health Services.
The authors conveniently ignore the United States and other wealthy countries and compare socialist economies to "capitalist" countries like Uganda, Rwanda, and Somalia, some of which were at war.
It's so stupid. But based on that, Pendleton tells her followers, "We have all the data showing that socialism does work."
She also celebrates communism because of its "increased life expectancy."
That's nonsense, too. People live longest in capitalist countries like Japan (85 years) and South Korea (84 years). Even in the United States (79 years), where more of us die young because we drive more (car accidents), eat more, shoot each other more often, and try more dangerous drugs, we still live longer than people in China (78 years).
Socialism is also superior, says Pendleton, because of "the 90-100 percent home ownership rates."
"One hundred percent," of course, is just dumb, but China (if you believe the party's statistics) does have 90 percent homeownership.
But not under socialism! They achieved that only after privatizing urban housing. Before 1998, when Chinese housing was still socialist, just 20 percent of Chinese people owned homes.
Several social media stars rave about China. "Socialism worked in China!" says TikToker Dante Munoz. "They lifted over 800 million people from poverty."
Again, it's true that in the last 50 years, China's gross domestic product (GDP) went from $156 per capita to more than $12,000. But that only happened after China gave up on real socialism and started embracing markets. Hong Kong, which adopted actual capitalism, raised per capita GDP to $50,000.
Before China reformed, millions of people died of starvation.
Another silly social media star, J.T. Chapman, tells his almost 2 million YouTube subscribers: "The central idea that unites all socialists is maximizing freedom…democratization of power."
Democratization? In most socialist countries, there's only one political party.
A popular TikToker calling himself Rathbone tells his hundred thousand subscribers: "capitalism…prioritizes profits over people…[but] socialism…prioritizes people over profits."
Likewise, Chapman says socialism offers the "guaranteed right to…health care, food, and shelter."
Well, of course socialism promises those things and claims to prioritize people over profits, but what people actually get is different.
As Cuban doctors put it in this video, "The Cuban health care system is destroyed….People are dying in the hallways."
Yet Chapman claims, "Innovation can flourish even when people are not motivated by profit. The USSR gave the world the anthrax vaccine, artificial satellites, and one of the earliest mobile phones."
That is true. But no one uses those phones today. Capitalism just creates much more.
Finally, Chapman says, "Ownership should be collective."
Collective ownership does feel good. "We'll share everything!"
But every attempt at collective ownership has failed.
One famous American example: 200 years ago, New Harmony, Indiana, abolished private property, promising a "community of equality."
The result was famine.
When people realized they could receive just as much barely working as they could working hard, many, naturally, worked less. Within a year, the commune experiment failed and property was returned to private hands.
What do these popular social media stars say when I confront them with these inconvenient truths? Sadly, I don't know. Not one would appear on Stossel TV to debate.
The bottom line: Incentives matter. No one washes a rental car. Few people care much about what belongs to everyone. It's just human nature.
Capitalism isn't perfect, but if we want a better future, and freedom, capitalism is the only thing that works.
COPYRIGHT 2025 BY JFS PRODUCTIONS INC.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Let's ask sarc.
Let's ask out-competed, obese, soon-to-be-replaced, right-wing dead ends of evolution.
Hey dude! Insulting Fatass MAGA deadbeats is my gig here!
Back off.
Your gig is being known as the pedo that got banned for posting a link to the dark web that had child pornography. Also being a liar, but you do share that role with several other leftists.
Look at you, playing with your socks!
turd, the ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
Oh, you’re the reverend. Kind of disappointed in myself I didn’t figure it out.
For anyone unfamiliar, Reverend Arthur Kirkland is a bigot that showed up here with Volokh. He hates all sorts of groups of people, but the group I find most interesting is masculine men, because he once admitted he spent his childhood getting pummeled by the bigger, stronger boys in his town.
I take your erroneous evaluation of my identity as a compliment, clinger.
Trump won, hicklib. Enjoy the remaining 47 months of his presidency.
Trump won and he used you and the rest of the incel brigade to get there. The incel brigade, however, did not win. You will come to understand why that is. Trump is not your friend. Incels have none.
I can't decide if I want to picture you foaming at the mouth or whacking off as you type your screeds.
Why my comments cause your para-human right wing mind to make sexual associations is beyond me. Your expiration and replacement will be truly for the better.
He does have a very strange obsession with other people's testosterone levels.
Also a fucking retarded leftist.
No obsession, just an easy observation as its lack produces every fiber of your anaemic hissy antics.
For the record I don’t support beating up sissies. They were wrong for violating the NAP. But I can imagine you were insufferable, probably told the teacher on your classmates every chance you got.
The seething, powerless rage of the eternally disenfranchised, right wing human residue is oozing at me as I read your comments.
Whacking off it is.
Arousal is not what I sought to elicit, but the impulses of fully degenerate, non-human right wing rejects are beyond my anticipatory ability.
You splooge yet?
Barely verbal, right-wing degenerate say what?
By the way i was dying at 'you splooge yet?', that was one good laugh, thank you skeptic
The rage is obvoiulsy projection. I'm having a chuckle at remembering back to when you admitted you were a bigot because you got beat up as a child.
Hey Sarc, your child molesting buddy wants to team up with you! That’s quite feather in your cap.
Capitalism isn't perfect, but if we want a better future, and freedom, capitalism is the only thing that works.
Yup.
Possibly one reason that so many Americans support socialism is that they look at the corporatist state, with its cronyism, asymmetric bargaining power, rent-seeking, etc. and, wrongly thinking that this is capitalism, prefer an alternative. And never having experienced real socialism, they have no idea how shitty it is.
I think a lot of people think socialism means free stuff, and don’t understand it’s a political and economic system. So they think Canada and Sweden are socialist.
A lot of people think socialism is all or nothing. So they think Canada and Sweden can't be the slightest bit socialist. Or the US for that matter.
So you’ve renounced your knowledge of economics. Good boy. You’re a true Trump defender now.
Sarcjeff gets dumber by the minute.
Good job gov’na shrike.
LOL thanks!
That, and at least a quarter of the population is functionally retarded.
This ^
Also, approx 36% (or more) of Americans think public utilities and services are socialism.
They also tend to think that socialism means something like a European welfare state. Which isn't very sustainable either. But is not the same as socialism. Lots of Euro countries tried some actual socialism and realized it was a terrible idea.
I have a positive view of theft and piracy. You do can enjoy free stuff.
Those $1400 Donnie checks sent to every deadbeat in the country popularized socialism.
No, all those AFDC welfare checks given out to women who prefer to be a baby factory than go to work popularized socialism.
That is why abortion drugs should be free.
That would only encourage them to do all things over again. Having a baby actually takes responsibility, and they don't want that.
I don’t think so, although I would have happily donated to your mom’s abortion.
I hear that in right wing backwaters, they still consider clothes hangers a technological innovation for that use case?
Wouldn’t know. Do you still communicate with anyone from your hometown? I would assume not since that’s the source of your bigotry, but maybe there’s a little bitch like you that didn’t escape that you’re friends with on Facebook?
'Communicating with everyone from my hometown' (in your imagination some dilapidated backwater like those your ilk likes to dwell in, I assume) must be something resource-constrained, can't keep up, permanently dependent, dysfunctional, defeated, out-competed, obsolete, soon-to-be-replaced, white-and-fading, impotent, uneducated, CURB STOMPED degenerates of your kind value highly due to their economic inviability.
(I think I overdid this one lmao, do you like it though? XD)
Why are you arguing with a grey box?
Lol this had me imagine an angry old man arguing with an appliance. least im not ol' sevo yelling at clouds
At my age “grey box” could mean coochie.
Oof. Poor sarc.
Fuck off nail.
So, wait, is this parody? I could have sworn that this handle used to be someone reasonable.
Why stop at free abortion drugs? Why not free sterilization drugs? You can make all the black racist fantasies come true and revive the original ethics of elitists at Planned Parenthood.
In the book Freakonomics they hypothesize that the dramatic drop in crime in the 90s could have been more than correlated with being twenty years after RvW. Most crimes are committed by young men raised by single moms who don’t give a crap. After RvW many crappy moms got abortions instead of becoming terrible single parents. The result was fewer criminals. That’s the hypothesis anyway. Yes I know to some people it’s basically blasphemy to insinuate that good things could come of abortion. Yes I know it’s racist to not point out how Planned Parenthood targets black communities. I’ve heard it all before. But I didn’t come up with the idea. I just thought it was interesting. They use numbers to back it up.
I highly recommend the book. It’s very “out of the box” as much as I hate the phrase.
That’s just one chapter, not the entire book.
Ever looked into how the claims made in that book held up?
You were banned for posting a link to child porn.
What did you spend your $1400 Donnie check on?
Meth? Do tell.
Actually I bought a glock with it.
Awww, look! Little qanon deadbeat mouthbreather bought an overpriced glock on government welfare, how clever, look at him sticking it to the system... HAHAHA good boy 😀 we are proud of you, all the times we
beat your brains outeducated you to become a better right-wing clinger are finally bearing fruits.If you can’t appreciate buying a gun with money I didn’t need from the feds I can’t help you.
And i bet you felt terribly alive and creative when you did!
Not really artie.
I feel your pain, loser. You have no reason to feel any of these ways, never had, and never will.
This doesn’t even make sense artie.
More evidence of low processing power in the obsolete. Carry on.
No, more evidence you’re dumb as fuck.
Maybe you can tell me what “creative” means?
I can tell you, but it would be like explaining a diesel engine to my dog. At best i would get some barking in return.
So you can’t explain how making a purchase is creative.
Creative uses for money and viable investments are certainly not the rights strong suit, therefore yes, I cannot explain this to you.
I never got one, as my income was well over the cutoff.
Peanuts, I’ve mentioned this before.
I have an old black dude working at the shipping department. I aksed him how he voted. He said he votes for Republicans every year.
“Bush sent me $300. Trump sent me $1400. That damn Obama never sent me a dime!”
Republicans earned his vote.
Nobody believes your bullshit pedo. Now turn yourself in for your crimes against children.
But it’s true white boy.
Bush /Trump sent out billions. Obama didn’t send you white trash a penny.
What’s true is that your original account was banned for posting a link to child porn.
What’s not true is that I’m white trash that needs a penny from the government.
I could be considered a redneck depending on your definition.
"Why Do Many Americans Have a Positive View of Socialism?"
Because these same useful idiots never lived in a socialist slave state.
Because the progressives took over our education system during the long march.
Yeah, quite a coincidence that it's roughly the same as the approval rating of the Democrat party. Almost as though the two are indistinguishable at this point...
The answer to the question is "because they're stupid, or ignorant, or both."
I believe the answer is "because they're stupid, ignorant, and gullible."
All the lefty's I know are extremely gullible. Not all of them are quite as stupid nor totally ignorant. They all believe the one small part of the lie that serves their interests and then just assume the rest of the lie must be true also.
No obsession, just an easy observation as it produces every fiber of your anaemic hissy antics.
The only way for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing. - Edmund Burke
John's a good man. You're not, hicklib.
I am delighted to receive ethics appraisals from the perpetually discredited.
You really fucked that up retard.
Monetizing an honest mistake in the face of an atrociously designed, glitchy website is the only triumph right-wing vermin will ever be allowed to enjoy by their betters.
I wish I could monetize your stupidity.
I feel your pain, loser, as I hear that impotent, incompetent right wingers habitually struggle to monetize anything.
Lemme guess, your daddy beat you every day, and you identify as a non-binary something-or-other and probably cut off your little winky.
'Why Do Many Americans Have a Positive View of Socialism?"
Because we have institutionalized dependency, extended childhood to age 30, over-tolerated (and subsidized) cos-play Marxists in academia and media, and generally made not just survival but comfortable life too easy.
Holy fuck i was literally dying while i did this, thank you all
No, you weren't. But, please, feel free to.
I think we’re hardwired for socialism because it worked for the first 300,000 years of our species existence. Tribal foragers in groups rarely less than Dunbar’s number could do socialism. Everyone knew everyone. No shirkers. It worked.
Problem is that it doesn’t scale well if at all. Arriving at that requires thought.
So I figure people instinctively gravitate towards socialism, and it’s perfectly natural. I used to feel that way. Now I think differently. And that’s the trick isn’t it? Getting people to think contrary to what they feel.
I think I have observed similar phaenomena in low-income, more criminal layers of society. Their mindset is surprisingly collectivistic and tribalistic. The tribal adhesive may be a preferred survival strategy in stressful, less predictable environments. And as society is still pretty stressful, we tend to still feel pretty socialistic.
Never thought of street gangs as humans abandoned by society forming groups similar to tribes, maybe in similar size to Dunbar’s number, practicing socialism within the tribe, warring with other tribes….
Hmmm
Society is what, five thousand years old? Compared to three hundred thousand years of spending your entire life wandering around and camping out with friends and family. I think we’re adapting. Maybe wokeness is us evolving into animals better adapted to urban environments. Like rats.
Y'all are more egg-headed, in a good way, than 99% of the ignorant rubes around here, knowing about Dunbar’s number and sociobiology (evolutionary psychology). Take a look at the following web pages... Despite the title to one of them, they aren't "religious"... They deal 0% with the unknown beyond-the-beyond. Sociobiology has some strange implications, which make sense only when you study up a tad, and think about it. I am thinking about "do-gooder derogation" here, especially.
http://www.churchofsqrls.com/Jesus_Validated/ and http://www.churchofsqrls.com/Do_Gooders_Bad/
Tim the Enchanter wants to know what you did with his magic flute. Squirrel it away?
Tell Tim the Enchanter to BUTT RIGHT OUT!!! Else I might be temped to go all "Karen" on him, and rat him out, for having a magic flute w/o the spermissions of the FDA, and Doctors of Doctorology!!!
To find precise details on what NOT to do, to avoid the flute police, please see http://www.churchofsqrls.com/DONT_DO_THIS/ … This has been a pubic service, courtesy of the Church of SQRLS!
Imagine being as simple minded as sarc?
Image being so simple minded this is the only response you can think of.
I think we’re hardwired for socialism because it worked for the first 300,000 years of our species existence. Tribal foragers in groups rarely less than Dunbar’s number could do socialism. Everyone knew everyone. No shirkers. It worked.
Problem is that it doesn’t scale well if at all. Arriving at that requires thought.
I think you could also say that there are biological evolutionary cases to be made for capitalism as well. If intra-tribe relations functioned as a socialist microcosm, than extra-tribe relations would benefit from trade and markets. Capitalism solved the problem of 'that tribe has something we want and we don't want to kill massive amounts of people to get it'. Of course, the problem is when what you want is the land that another tribe is occupying. We still haven't figured that one out.
I have to disagree. Capitalism has no biological evolutionary base, but rather a more social base. Once humans transitioned from hunter gathers to fixed agriculture history sees the idea of trading develop. Part of this is because hunter gathers generally don't have surplus while agriculture allows people to have surplus. It is also at this same point that government begins to develop. Capitalism requires structure while hunter gathers rely on simple family rules.
Why Do Many Americans Have a Positive View of Socialism?
Propaganda works, that's why the left has spent the last 5 decades marching through our institutions so they can subject our children to it. Meanwhile the message is simply seductive: there is a simple and easy solution to all our problems and those people over there are preventing us from implementing it. But if you help us all the difficulties of life will go away.
Thanks for fingering the decimal guy. Had him in a gray box as Rev. Don't have time to waste on idiots like this clown so back in the box little fella.
"Clinger" was the giveaway. People like to think they can be someone else. But they don't understand how their specific arguments and in this case insults are tells.
M.A.S.H. hater.
It's very similar to how left wingers believe they can pose as libertarians hoping that seeming like part of the group will make their arguments more effective. But they can't let go of their true selves so they have tells, like a complete inability to apply consistent principles.
I was making a joke about corporal Clinger (however it’s spelled) and that was it.
Take a sedative.
Nah, I think Artie died. This decimal loser isn't 0.000001% as clever as Artie (who wasn't very clever at all).
Decimal douche is just a rage-bait troll.
I tend to agree. When was the last time anyone saw an actual Rev post? This guy just went on Mute for the same reasons, though. Rev did use 'clingers' a lot, but also could not go 5 seconds without talking about something getting rammed down someone's throat.
Picture, if you will, a huge billboard on a busy highway. A caricature of AOC is depicted wearing a white leotard and bunny ears. "Screw the Rich" is splashed diagonally across the leotard in red. Her expression is that classic AOC with the bug-out eyes and buck teeth. Standing along the sidelines, applauding her are Michelle Obama, Jamie Raskin, Chuck Schumer, Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi and other assorted villains of the Democrat Party. A caption below the image reads:
"Silly Rabbit! Socialism is the ELITES' Paradise."
The left will say anything to wield Gov-'GUNS' to go out and STEAL for them.
Because they're criminals at heart and have failed to learn that *EARNING* is required to GETTING.
Best Bezos-response tweet so far:
Bezos really wanted a Lord of the Rings TV show but the libtards he assigned it to screwed it up so badly he became a Republican.
There so many good things happening right now, and all it took was Trump winning again to give these other people the guts to move forward. Not yet tired of all the winning.
Why do 36% of Americans Believe in Socialism?
Because 32% believe in the Easter Bunny, 28% believe aliens are still being experimented on at Roswell, 24% believe Elvis had JFK killed, 21% believe JFK had Elvis killed, 18% believe chem trails are poisoning the water...
We're not setting a high bar here. This is Americans we're talking about
And 39% believe Afro-Americans are entitled to "reparations"; 49% believe in "white supremacy"; 50% believe the Jan. 6 demonstration was an "insurrection"; 70% believe mRNA shots prevent COVID infection. Yes, the bar is set low.
How does support for socialism vary with age? I suspect that it's strongest among young adults, who've spent most of their lives living in a functioning socialist system—the nuclear family. I don't negotiate the wage I get for mowing the lawn and taking out the trash, Mom doesn't charge me the market price for meals, and Dad doesn't make us pay rent for the house on which he pays the mortgage. It's a situation where "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" actually seems to work.
Alas, it doesn't scale to a larger society. But it takes time and some unpleasant experience of the world to learn this; and until I do, the failings of a socialist order seem like abstract arguments, compared to my 18 or so years of lived experience in a functional socialist-like environment.
Alas, it doesn't scale to a larger society.
Yup. Hence the Dunbar Number mentioned above.
Brilliant observation, Egg!
Might that also explain why more homogeneous societies seem to tolerate higher levels of socialism? (And why the globalist version would be the ultimate obscenity?)
Imagine when you were young and excited about the world!
After you got out of school, you and two of your best friends decided to get an apartment together. You were all working at the same place too, at the beginning, all making the same amount of money. So you decided to split everything evenly (rent, groceries, utilities). And you decided that since you were all friends that decisions about the household would be made by a binding vote, majority rule.
All goes well at first, and all the votes are unanimous.
But after a while, you get a better job and soon are making 10% more than your buddies. At the same time, their hours have been cut back and so they aren't taking in as much as they were before. A vote is held, and 2-1 they decide that you should pay 10% more rent, and they will pay 5% less each. Recognizing, at least, that this is a tad unfair to you, they vote to give you the better bedroom.
After a while, you get a promotion (because you're a good employee) and are earning twice what your buddies earn. One of your buddies gets fired for not showing up at work on time. Another 2-1 vote is cast deciding that you will have to pay his share of the rent until he gets another job. You've already got the nice bedroom, so no new concessions come your way. You begin to wonder if that roommate is really serious about getting a job.
Later, you've found an even better job, one that recognizes the value in the degree you got (you took night classes and worked during the day). By now, you're pretty rich compared to your buddies. They're both out of work now--it's a tough economy, you know--but they've got 99 weeks of unemployment checks. You shudder when they found out how much you make, knowing a 2-1 vote is coming, and sure enough you are now on the hook for all the rent. Your buddies promise to use their UI checks to pay for their own groceries, though.
99 weeks later, another 2-1 vote forces you to pay all the rent, all the utilities, buy all the groceries, and to provide $250 each month to each roommate.
It has occurred to you more than once that the only way out of this situation is to quit your job, and thus restore equality, hoping that now with everyone in the same boat your roommates will be impelled to rejoin the workforce. But by yet another 2-1 vote you are forced to return to work.
When you point out that this is tantamount to slavery, you're met with dumb stares and open hands waiting for their check.
Because 36% of Americans are entitled brats who cannot handle money properly and resent having to be productive in creating things other people want in order to make a living.
"Capitalism isn't perfect," may be the reason that people are inclined to look to socialism. I am not aware of any nation on earth that has a pure capitalist economy. The vast majority of countries use a blend of capitalism and socialism. Capitalism to provide incentive to work and socialism to blunt capitalism rough edges. Countries' economies differ by the balance between capitalism and socialism. Stossel's article is again just another socialism is "bad" piece and provides little in value as we know about the socialist failures. The real question that people have to ask is what is the blend of capitalism and socialism that best works for the society. What are the sideboards a society what on capitalism and what types of socialist safety nets do we want to provide. What history tells us is that the most stable and democratic societies blend capitalism and socialism to favor the middle class.
You could ask the same about astrology.
Why? Because the American public has been lied to, and willfully believed, that they can have whatever they want and that someone else will pay for it.
Three generations so far, social security, then medicare, now the takeover of academia and public schools by hard leftists.
The problem is, most people believe the lies at this point because no one dares tell them the truth, and if they do tell the truth and are a politician, they do not get (re-elected). If they continue the lies and are a "journalist", they get promoted or up-voted.
"Why Do 36 Percent of Americans Have a Positive View of Socialism?"
See 5.56; brain death is common among lefty shits.
"In most socialist countries, there's only one political party."
That's because that one political party is the bestest, mostest popular and perfectest demo kratic political party EVER, John! When 99.96% of the workers love their Dear Leader and only a few social criminals who actually want to eat and not die of cancer engage in sour grapes, you only NEED one political party to represent you!
The UK and Israel were almost totally socialist for decades. They thrived. In fact, there might have been mass starvation in Israel had it had a free market economy then. But both had thriving free democratic rule.
"But every attempt at collective ownership has failed."
That's because they didn't do it right! You're just jealous because you don't have a million TikTok followers like the Useful Idiots do, probably mostly because you aren't pudgy with a scraggly anarchist beard and don't have pink hair in pigtails!
What about the collective ownership of the Green Bay Packers? GB Packers are the only team in professional American football that are collectively owned through stock. They also have one, if not the most, loyal fan bases.
What's interesting imo about them is that it is the owners of other sports franchises who exclude collective ownership. GB is grandfathered in but no further ones are allowed. For a long time, corporate ownership was prohibited but they (or at least non-NFL) have now allowed that with most definitely double-secret protocols/agreements.
The reason is - collective ownership (esp by fans) eliminates the most lucrative threat that teams can make against their 'home town'. ie threaten to move unless the owner gets a big cronyist stadium package. There is no way a town like Green Bay could get an NFL franchise. It's comparable to Des Moines. Even with half their games in Milwaukee, their media market is small.
A small market team like Oakland is valuable to everyone else because it can threaten to move to Las Vegas. Likewise if Jacksonville, New Orleans, Buffalo ever falter locally - they can always threaten to move to Portland, Sacramento, Orlando, Salt Lake City, San Antonio etc. Not GB though.
Those threats to relocate are why American team franchises are so valuable compared to other team franchises elsewhere. It is monopoly 101 - control team entry/exit. And is why so few Americans play team sports - or attend games - beyond school compared to other places.
Stossel is embarrassing. The US has huge successful agricultural cooperatives that dominate some markets. And the most common form of individual home ownership in NYC is the apartment cooperative.
Those cooperatives are voluntary. Socialism may start by democratic means, but as with any government, enforcement is ultimately at the point of a gun.
Right after Stossel wrote that "every attempt at collective ownership has failed," he wrote this:
One famous American example: 200 years ago, New Harmony, Indiana, abolished private property, promising a "community of equality."
The result was famine.
When people realized they could receive just as much barely working as they could working hard, many, naturally, worked less. Within a year, the commune experiment failed and property was returned to private hands.
Except that I couldn't find anything about "famine" in New Harmony, even in an article about this early socialist experiment at a free market think tank.
That article talks about how it didn't "produce enough food to be self-sufficient," but that isn't the same thing as famine, as they certainly could have been buying food from outside of the community. If the articles I found highly critical of New Harmony's cooperative nature and communal ownership don't say that anyone actually died of hunger, then it is pretty clear that Stossel just made that up. Or, he was just repeating what some other hack that didn't bother to do actual research into the history of New Harmony had said about it.
This is what bothers me so much about Stossel. Earlier in his career, he may have been somewhat successful at real journalism that required research, but he long ago stopped doing that and just finds little snippets that he can use to go off on some rant, just like any other partisan or ideological commentator that doesn't bother fact checking anything they say.
Because 36% of Americans will believe in anything -- UFOs, Big Foot, Hollywood celebrities, you name it. They are what we call morons.
Why didn't Stossel note that the positive views of socialism expressed in that 2022 poll are actually lower than those expressed in the 2019 poll on the same question?
And why a column today on a poll released more than two years ago, without also mentioning that?
What Stossel doesn't understand about this is obvious once you see how he focuses on communist countries and others with authoritarian governments that are socialist and says nothing about the mixed economies that you find in every wealthy nation, which also happen to be liberal democracies. Yes, the U.S. is a mixed economy because it does have social welfare programs that redistribute wealth, just like the European welfare states do. We just do much less of that.
The false dichotomy set up by Stossel is obvious to anyone without ideological blinders on. Pure free-market capitalism or Marxism! Those are the choices!
"People live longest in capitalist countries like Japan (85 years) and South Korea (84 years)."
Which both have universal health insurance. Some socialist stuff actually works.
This is an example of the really silly anti intellectual nonsense we get from the political Right today. There are no socialists of consequence among US politicians. The ones who call themselves socialists like Bernie and AOC don't actually want the government to take over the economy other than health insurance. Interestingly, Saint Donald Trump does, but he is like Mussolini not Lenin.
Many kids are confusing 'socialist' countries with countries who have capitalist economic systems but also have a lot of social welfare spending like national health programs and free universities etc. They see places like the Nordic countries where people are mostly happy with their 'Social Democrat' politicians. The Nordic countries are not Socialist. They are free market countries with a lot of taxation and social welfare spending.
Because we argue about the right to have books about perverted homosexual penguins in schools.
2 of 3 Americans Wouldn’t Pass U.S. Citizenship Test
https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2018-10-12/2-of-3-americans-wouldnt-pass-us-citizenship-test
AND
Data from the 2024 index reveals how financial literacy in the US has hovered around 50% for eight consecutive years, with a 2% drop in the past two years.
Now this was the academy's fault, splitting Political Economy into 2 insular subjects. Of course people are thinking wrongly. Politics is Economics and Economics is Politics
An exception to this distressing rule is the University of Alaska at Fairbanks. UAF requires students to take a course on Political Economy, a “survey of the evolution and operation of the American domestic political economy, with consideration of market failures and government responses” and a “review of major issues in political economy such as inflation, poverty, and budget deficits.”
Ignorance & Greed
Understandably, a substantial portion of American view Socialism positively. They are ignorant of the mechanics of Socialism. All that they know is that they obtain someone else's wealth via the government. Greed allows them to overlook the fact that such an "entitlement" is legalized theft.
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can exist only until a majority of voters discover that they can vote themselves largess out of the public treasury.” - Alexander Tyler (1747-1813)
As described in the novel, Inescapable Consequences, Socialism violates the basic laws of nature. In understanding the factors controlling behavior, look to context and consequences.
You almost have the mirror image of the right answer:
They are ignorant of their own economy and their own Founding. You do not need to see what is wrong with socialism if you can see what is right with our Founding.
I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education.”
Thomas Jefferson, Letter to W. C. Jarvis, September 28, 182
“The republican is the only form of government which is not eternally at open or secret war with the rights of mankind.”
Thomas Jefferson, Letter to William Hunter, 1790